Texture sizes?

Alka · Dec 2005

This has really been bothering me when I look at other peoples work for demos, how big is too big with your texture sizes? I know for smaller objects a 256x256 would be a maximum resolution but say for a hotel in a city would it be best to go as high as 1024x1024 or should it be a 512? Are there any sort of standards I should be looking into setting up for my demo reel?

(If it makes any difference on textures I am most interested in working with EA/Radical Entertainment).

Jeff Parrott · Dec 2005

I think too big would be 2048. Sure people will disagree. But for personal work I think the time needed to get the most out of it you could have focused your efforts other places. If you're doing mult maps per material I would say 512 would be good. 1024 would be fine too. I would imagine it would depend on how confident you are with your textures. I think 256 might be a bit low with most places starting next gen projects.

Alka · Dec 2005

Well I say 256 for object like crates, barrels, lamp posts, etc. I've always thought, and correct me if im totally wrong on this, if it's small and not going to be in the players field of view for an extended period of time it should have a much smaller resolution texture.

Jeff Parrott · Dec 2005

Well you should probably maintain the same texture density across everything. Easiest way is to map a checkerboard on everything and keep the squares to whatever size you decied. Like 256 pixel square is 1 meter or whatever. But yeah, if it's smaller then less texture resolution for it.

Ryno · Dec 2005

Take into account how close you will be able to get to an object in game, and what the platform will be. I recently had to re-do a boatload of textures because when we got our 360 dev kit hooked up to some high def TVs, and the textures just looked like pixelated garbage. For example:

If you have a non-tiling 256 covering a large prop of let's say a large dumpster, and the player can walk right up to that prop, you're going to have issues. On a high def screen, that 256 or more likely only a portion of it will be covering one entire side of the dumpster. And if I am right next to it, that prop could be displayed at 1920x1080 (HD), where it will break down severely.

Work bigger than you need to play it safe. Check the stuff in-game, and if the texture sizes are excessive, then downsize them.

As jeffro mentioned, maintaining a consistent texel density can be a good thing.

malcolm · Dec 2005

Here is my basic rule of thumb when working at EA. Find out how close the camera will get to objects in your scene and use texture resolution according to how much screen space the object will actually fill. Other than that it really depends on the game you are working on, next gen is here now too so you get more space but you also get more maps eating up that space, lightmap, heightmap, spec map, colour map. I suggest finding some screenshots of a game you like and study them to see how much texture space you think they are using. I also recommend starting big and scaling down, 512x512 = 256x256 when you are ready to put it in the game.

Jeff Parrott · Dec 2005

Malcolm makes a point depends on the camera fill. But since it's a demo reel I would really just stay with a set scale or create for the renders views you decide with.

adam · Dec 2005

Also, a building like you had mentioned isn't textured like a character or environment piece. They're usually textured out of low resolution textures that tile vertically and horizontally nicely. If I could access my site right now I'd show you what I mean with a building I worked on.

You also have to think about how much memory you'd be alotted per scene. Although its current gen, PS2 is a good example of memory usage. You're sometimes only given 1mb to do an entire building...

Jeff Parrott · Dec 2005

Good points Bromell. But the being for a demo reel has an underlying focus that should be, make it kick ass. I really don't think any demo piece should be limited to texture space unless it was an art test.

adam · Dec 2005

Hmm, I disagree. Well, not completely. If you can show that you have knowledge in areas such as texture memory allocation aswell as do something 'kick ass' that doesn't worry about limitations I think you and your portfolio would be golden.

malcolm · Dec 2005

I agree with both of you, kind of. You can get a job in the games industry either way. Just make sure if you are going to work to fake contraints that your artwork doesn't suffer from it. And like wise, if you are going to go crazy with 1024x1024 textures be prepared to be able to create the same result with 256x256 textures.

Jeff Parrott · Dec 2005

After thinking about it using constraints on one piece might be good to see you can do it. Like you're saying malcolm, as long as it kicks ass still.

adam · Dec 2005

Don't listen to malcolm. Anyone who owns a tweed grey wolf t-shirt is surely crazy.

Shady-D · Dec 2005

so what about player models in third person games, cuz theyre on your screen most of the time and pretty close (ussually) i personally use 512 for face/head cuz i think thats important and should have detail and for body etc 256
side objects like gun holsters etc 128.. is this right or should i change my ways of thinking?

adam · Dec 2005

Uh, if you're doing a 512 for the head you should be doing 512 for the rest of the body. Thats just a too large of a gap between 2 main areas like that.

malcolm · Dec 2005

My wolf shirt ownzzzzzzzz.

Texture sizes?

Replies